Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: The mistake in the ssdf list

Author: Mark Young

Date: 18:18:21 10/04/98

Go up one level in this thread


On October 04, 1998 at 13:02:17, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On October 03, 1998 at 09:59:52, Moritz Berger wrote:
>
>>On October 03, 1998 at 09:54:53, blass uri wrote:
>>
>>>I did not see a great success for fritz5 in tournaments of computer programs
>>>for example you can see the results in Shep's tournament
>>>Fritz5 has 1.5 out of 4
>>
>>Fritz won a big tournament played by Torsten Schoop, AFAIR.
>
>
>I think *everyone* is looking at the wrong aspect of learning.  It is not
>about finding "good" openings against a single opponent... it is *much*
>more important to detect *bad* openings against *all* opponents.  This is
>the valuable part of "crafty's book learning" results...  to take a huge
>collection of PGN games, about 2/3 million games, in fact, and then play from
>these games and learn which moves are to be avoided.  If you look at my
>LearnFunction() you will notice that I don't pay much attention to "winning"
>and concentrate on "losing" lines...
>
>If I can eliminate the losing lines, I identify the "winners" by default.  But
>mainly I want to eliminate the "losers".  It is working, and *anyone* can down-
>load my book source, then download my "learning" data and have a book that is
>based on 50,000 OTB games played from an opening book of 2/3 million games...
>
>And not see too many outright blunders as a result...

I agree learning would work for both tournament (many different players) and
match play (single player). I find this to be true when I play online by hand,
so crafty that plays 1000x more and this still holds true I think is pretty
conclusive that learning is a valuable part of a programs overall strength.
Therefore, leaning should not be circumvented or disabled in anyway in SSDF
testing. If other programs do not have learning or have non-effective leaning
then those programs need to improve in that area so they can compete effectively
in SSDF testing. I do not see the sense in SSDF should try to make a so-called
even playing field by handicapping those programs that have added good leaning
features to their programs.



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.